ISAResearch Zentrum, Kardiologie, Deutsches Herzzentrum München, Technische Universität München, Munich, Germany.
Deutsches Zentrum für Herz-Kreislauf-Forschung, Partner Site Munich Heart Alliance, Munich, Germany.
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2024 Nov;104(5):909-917. doi: 10.1002/ccd.31228. Epub 2024 Sep 18.
We previously showed non-inferiority of a low-dose paclitaxel-coated balloon (PCB) with citrate excipient (Agent PCB) as compared to normal-dose iopromide excipient (SeQuent Please PCB) in terms of angiographic and clinical endpoints at 12 months. The long-term clinical efficacy and safety of Agent PCB is not defined.
262 patients (323 DES-ISR lesions) were enrolled in this study and treated with either Agent PCB (125 patients, 151 lesions) in the ISAR-DESIRE 3a trial or with SeQuent Please PCB (137 patients, 172 lesions) in the setting of the randomized ISAR-DESIRE 3 trial with similar in- and exclusion criteria serving as historical control arm. The follow-up period was extended to 7 years. The efficacy and safety endpoints of this analysis were target-lesion revascularization (TLR), death, myocardial infarction (MI) and target lesion thrombosis (TLT) at 7 years.
At 7 years, 206 patients (78.6%) were alive. The risks of TLR (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.29, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.87-1.90; p = 0.205), death (HR: 1.38, 95% CI: 0.82-2.35; p = 0.227), MI (HR: 1.10, 95% CI: 0.39-3.15; p = 0.852) and TLT (HR: 2.18, 95% CI: 0.20-24.10; p = 0.523) were comparable between Agent PCB and SeQuent PCB. Multivariate analysis showed comparable risks of TLR, death and MI between both PCB devices.
In patients treated for DES-ISR by angioplasty with Agent PCB and SeQuent Please PCB, there was no statistically significant difference in TLR at 7 years. Randomized trials with standardized lesion preparation and long-term follow-up are warranted to further evaluate comparative efficacy of both devices. (ClinicalTrials. gov Identifier: NCT02367495).
我们之前的研究表明,与正常剂量碘普罗胺赋形剂(SeQuent Please PCB)相比,低剂量紫杉醇涂层球囊(Agent PCB)在 12 个月时的血管造影和临床终点方面具有非劣效性。Agent PCB 的长期临床疗效和安全性尚未确定。
262 例患者(323 例 DES-ISR 病变)纳入本研究,分别接受 Agent PCB(125 例,151 例病变)治疗(ISAR-DESIRE 3a 试验)或接受 SeQuent Please PCB(137 例,172 例病变)治疗(ISAR-DESIRE 3 试验,采用类似的纳入和排除标准作为历史对照臂)。随访时间延长至 7 年。本分析的疗效和安全性终点为 7 年时的靶病变血运重建(TLR)、死亡、心肌梗死(MI)和靶病变血栓形成(TLT)。
7 年后,206 例患者(78.6%)存活。TLR 风险(风险比 [HR]:1.29,95%置信区间 [CI]:0.87-1.90;p=0.205)、死亡(HR:1.38,95% CI:0.82-2.35;p=0.227)、MI(HR:1.10,95% CI:0.39-3.15;p=0.852)和 TLT(HR:2.18,95% CI:0.20-24.10;p=0.523)在 Agent PCB 和 SeQuent Please PCB 之间无统计学差异。多变量分析显示,两种 PCB 装置的 TLR、死亡和 MI 风险相当。
在接受 Agent PCB 和 SeQuent Please PCB 治疗的 DES-ISR 患者中,7 年时 TLR 无统计学差异。需要进行标准化病变准备和长期随访的随机试验,以进一步评估两种器械的疗效比较。(ClinicalTrials.gov 标识符:NCT02367495)